Hello all! Happy day two!
This will be a (possibly time-sensitive) update about tonight’s business meeting. I have some deeper thoughts stemming from the talk I attended earlier called “Disrupting Church”, but I will wait to share those until I have more time to write.
The business meeting considered five amendments to the proposed revisions to Article II. Those were the first five amendments listed in this document. I will not duplicate the amendments here, for lack of time, but please read them in the linked document.
Unless I recieve a compelling argument before 9:30 Eastern Time (in an hour and a half, at time of writing), I plan to vote as follows on these amendments, with brief explanation of my reasoning. Again, please review the amendments in the linked document.
Amendment 30 by Viola Abbitt: adds spiritual development
I plan to vote yes to this amendment. To me, faith formation and spiritual development are very different, and I believe that both deserve to be called forth in our bylaws.
Amendment 26 by David Schwartz: adds creation of new UU communities
I plan to vote yes to this amendment. In this troubled time, I believe that our values are more important than ever in the world. Let’s lean in to spreading our values and our faith. UUism truly has the power to change lives, and we should support anyone trying to grow it.
Amendment 19 by Bek Wheeler: revises equity value
I plan to vote no to this amendment. I wholeheartedly agree with the Article II commission and the many delegates who echoed this sentiment: The time has passed for language like “affirm” and “work to”, in this context. We need to make strong declarations of the rights of all people, and stand by those declarations.
I also fully support the effort to explicitly lift up the worthiness rather than the worth of people. The word “worth” has connotations that just do not help in these times. It harks back to slavery, and selling people for money. It also invokes the hyper-capitalist notion of monetary worth of a person, which is very unhelpful and destructive. I’m aware that this is not the definition of worth that was intended when the principles were written. However, to paraphrase one delegate who spoke today: If some language is potentially harmful and open to misinterpretation, and other language accomplishes the objective just as well or better, then let’s not be afraid of some change.
Amendment 61 by Jan Radoslovich: adds current Seven Principles as historic context
I plan to vote no to this amendment. It was said well by another delegate: “We are writing bylaws, not a history book”.
Last time Article II was rewritten (when the current principles and sources were added), the commission started by reimagining the document, as the current commission has done. The central texts of the original Article II were not maintained as “historical context” or for any other reason then, and they should not be now. If we leave the current principles in the bylaws, it will leave open the opportunity for things to not really change. We need strong and decisive change in this time to maintain relevance and re-grow our faith.
Removing the principles from the bylaws does not require anyone to stop practicing them, or even using them to explain UUism. I predict that our seven principles will remain a core part of the beliefs of many UUs, and that is great. However, the bylaws of the association should move on to be more decisive and more declarative.
Amendment 25 by Howard Tolley: changes language of love and covenant/accountability
I plan to vote no to this amendment. I believe that we simply cannot afford to remove calls for accountability from our bylaws, or anywhere else in the world.
Additionally, to paraphrase another delegate: Over the years, we have often had a hard time as a tradition distinguishing between “peace” as an absence of conflict and “peace” as justice for all. We can’t have justice without accountability, and justice is what we need in this world.
Please reach out to me if you have any questions/feedback/things you’d like me to consider. In addition, we will be considering more amendments from the linked document tomorrow. Please review those, and let me know if you have any thoughts on them.
Tonight’s ballot closes at 10:00, and I plan to vote as I said above at 9:30. Please voice any objections to my positions before that time, if you would like to influence my voting.
Signing off,
-Hans